quest_ii_from_the_west_to_the_wider_worldfandomcom-20200214-history
Talk:The F-Word: Feminism, Art and Politics/@comment-24420243-20140417044459
I believe there is substantial evidence that, as Butler posits in from last paragraph of page 191 of the handout to the end, gender "identity" need not be reliant on a consistent pattern of behaviour to be considered legitimate, as, in a way, it is possible that they may never truly exist. "Genders can be neither true nor false, neither real nor apparent, neither original nor derived." I personally know individuals who "identify" as gender-flexible. Depending on what they feel like on a given day, they may dress and "identify" as a male or a female. However, even then, they do not completely lock themselves into a certain gender. They are not attempting to be a "woman" or a "man", their behaviour may contain aspects of both genders, with fluctuations between different behaviours characteristic of "conventional" genders commonplace. In their view, they may identify as "male" or "female" simultaneously. For individuals like this, description of gender "identity" at a given time cannot be accurately undertaken using the concepts of "masculinity" and "femininity". A continuum of gender may exist, unhampered by any socially or biologically imposed boundaries. In this way, gender identity itself seems to cease to exist. Butler would seem to agree that a description of drag queens as either parodies of femininity or replicants of femininity is a gross oversimplification. Identifying people within the limited confines of "masculinity" and "feminintiy" is misleading and inaccurate. Knowing people who have performed in drag, I can say that it is not necessarily an attempt to conform to another gender stereotype, nor is it simply intended to ridicule the concept of gender stereotypes, but it can be an expression of one's freedom to behave in a manner completely uninhibited by gender identification, as though gender itself were nonexistant. For some people, feminism itself is not necessarily a glorification of the female gender or call for equality with men while maintaining the distinction of female gender, but a dissolution of the boundaries of gender identity. In a way, feminism can have as little to do with the female gender as with the male. Separate but equal was insufficient for civil rights, and I believe it may be seen as insufficient for gender equality. It's a loose analogy, but it does help illustrate the idea that feminism in its call for female equality is a call for the dissolution of the female identity itself. It is essentially an asexual movement. While the gay community has its own stereotypes and interal classifications, it does generally present an essentially gender free environment. Behaviour ranging from "hyper-masculinity" to "effiminacy" are seen in individuals throughout the community in varying degrees and combinations. People feel freer to do what they feel like at the moment, unimpeded by the regulatory influences of heterosexual gender identities. While I do not identify myself as a female, I at times act in ways typically categorized as effiminate. I do not personally feel obligated to obey or recognize the existence of gender specific characteristics. What this ultimately comes down to is the realization that gender normative behaviour is a social construct without a concrete basis in reality.